4 ms·

Here's a hot take: I think this kind of pride in ignorance of social happenings is just as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. They both seem like attemp

by shawnz 3y ago

Here's a hot take: I think this kind of pride in ignorance of social happenings is just as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. They both seem like attempts to paper over feelings of exclusion from one group by using feelings of inclusion in another group. Why not just let people like what they like without judgement?

explaininjs 3y ago
[flagged]
- idiotsecant 3y ago
  You get that the month is not about celebrating the biblical sin, right? Words can have multiple meanings, Orel.
  - blangk 3y ago
    Are you sure about that?
    - arpa 3y ago
      I don't know about OP, but I am.
      - explaininjs 3y ago
        From Wikipedia: > Pride is defined by Merriam-Webster as "reasonable self-esteem" or "confidence and satisfaction in oneself".[1] Oxford defines it as "the quality of having an excessively high opinion of oneself or one's own importance."[2] This may be related to one's own abilities or achievements, positive characteristics of friends or family, or one's country. Richard Taylor defined pride as "the justified love of oneself",[3] as opposed to false pride or narcissism. Similarly, St. Augustine defined it as "the love of one's own excellence",[4] and Meher Baba called it "the specific feeling through which egoism manifests."[5] Seems to capture "both" aspects for the word to me.
- cole-k 3y ago
  Wait 'til you hear what they call a group of lions.
  - arpa 3y ago
    welp here comes trouble
  - explaininjs 3y ago
    See sibling for the working definition I'm using. This argument is so weak I have to wonder if you actually agree with me.
peoplefromibiza 3y ago
> pride in ignorance of social happenings is just as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. are you sure? I mean, math is math, wherever you go, the rules always apply, they can be updated, but once you know something, it is valid until proven wrong. OTOH "social happenings" (which really is a synonym for "people branding", marketing in short) makes no sense at all. I can understand why someone decides to completely ignore something like this https://www.harpersbazaar.com/beauty/hair/g43794418/summer-2023-hair-trends/ https://www.harpersbazaar.com/beauty/hair/g43794418/summer-2...
- BoiledCabbage 3y ago
  > I can understand why someone decides to completely ignore something like this The fact that you can't see the other side of this shows how one-sided type view point is. 99% of people will never need or use calculus in their life. Most jobs have zero to do with Excel. There are probably 100s of millions of people who care about what celebrity X is up to, and a factoid about a defunct app, on a dead phone, by a dissolved company is almost the definition of useless trivia. It's the person who knows how many pieces of dryer lint were in Dan Quayle's pocket the day he got married. You just happen to care about it. Knowing celebrity news allows for instant connection with millions of people who also know about this news. In practical terms you can with higher probability form a bond with someone by talking with them about celebrity news then tour can by opening a conversion on obscure math (or computer) topic. If your job is able building relationships, or you simply care about connecting with people it's a much more efficient way of doing so. Guess what? You likely don't have this knowledge. And you probably are glad you don't, and are maybe even proud that your don't. And you likely excuse yourself for feeling this way, while blaming others for feeling the same about a topic your care about.
  - peoplefromibiza 3y ago
    > 99% of people will never need or use calculus in their life. Most jobs have zero to do with Excel. doesn't imply that ignoring the Kardashians is as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. (direct quote from you) > There are probably 100s of millions of people who care about what celebrity X is up to But if those celebrities died together at the same time, very few of those 100 millions people would actually suffer any consequence. So they are basically useless to society, math and science are provably not. > Knowing celebrity news allows for instant connection with millions of people who also know about this news I'll pass om that, thank you. Millions of people watch soccer in my country, never cared for a second. Guess what? I have tons of connections with people I share common interests with. Who would have thought that was possible? > Guess what? You likely don't have this knowledge. And you probably are glad you don't, and are maybe even proud that your don't. Have you ever considered that people simply don't care and their life is just as good as anybody else? I honestly don't understand what drives your thought process, but if you are thinking that I need to excuse myself for not caring about most famous people, sorry to break the news for you, you don't know how wrong you are. > while blaming others for feeling the same about a topic your care about. That's just you assuming bad faith. I don't care what other people care about or not, it doesn't affect me at all, I simply replied to pride in ignorance of social happenings is just as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. It is simply not.
dclowd9901 3y ago
I think this is a good way to demonize a person for displaying proud ignorance of a topic but is probably inaccurate. Just as I simply do not care about celebrity news (rather than actively despise its existence), I’m sure many people simply do not care about many of the things I enjoy. I don’t begrudge them that. We all have a limited time on earth, and we spend that time on things we enjoy. Most of us probably can’t even explain _why_ we like the things we do, but part of enjoying what we do means not over analyzing it, and rather just giving ourselves to it. I think this applies universally to interests.

by shawnz 3y ago

explaininjs 3y ago

[flagged]

idiotsecant 3y ago
You get that the month is not about celebrating the biblical sin, right? Words can have multiple meanings, Orel.
- blangk 3y ago
  Are you sure about that?
  - arpa 3y ago
    I don't know about OP, but I am.
    - explaininjs 3y ago
      From Wikipedia: > Pride is defined by Merriam-Webster as "reasonable self-esteem" or "confidence and satisfaction in oneself".[1] Oxford defines it as "the quality of having an excessively high opinion of oneself or one's own importance."[2] This may be related to one's own abilities or achievements, positive characteristics of friends or family, or one's country. Richard Taylor defined pride as "the justified love of oneself",[3] as opposed to false pride or narcissism. Similarly, St. Augustine defined it as "the love of one's own excellence",[4] and Meher Baba called it "the specific feeling through which egoism manifests."[5] Seems to capture "both" aspects for the word to me.
cole-k 3y ago
Wait 'til you hear what they call a group of lions.
- arpa 3y ago
  welp here comes trouble
- explaininjs 3y ago
  See sibling for the working definition I'm using. This argument is so weak I have to wonder if you actually agree with me.

peoplefromibiza 3y ago

> pride in ignorance of social happenings is just as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. are you sure? I mean, math is math, wherever you go, the rules always apply, they can be updated, but once you know something, it is valid until proven wrong. OTOH "social happenings" (which really is a synonym for "people branding", marketing in short) makes no sense at all. I can understand why someone decides to completely ignore something like this https://www.harpersbazaar.com/beauty/hair/g43794418/summer-2023-hair-trends/ https://www.harpersbazaar.com/beauty/hair/g43794418/summer-2...

BoiledCabbage 3y ago
> I can understand why someone decides to completely ignore something like this The fact that you can't see the other side of this shows how one-sided type view point is. 99% of people will never need or use calculus in their life. Most jobs have zero to do with Excel. There are probably 100s of millions of people who care about what celebrity X is up to, and a factoid about a defunct app, on a dead phone, by a dissolved company is almost the definition of useless trivia. It's the person who knows how many pieces of dryer lint were in Dan Quayle's pocket the day he got married. You just happen to care about it. Knowing celebrity news allows for instant connection with millions of people who also know about this news. In practical terms you can with higher probability form a bond with someone by talking with them about celebrity news then tour can by opening a conversion on obscure math (or computer) topic. If your job is able building relationships, or you simply care about connecting with people it's a much more efficient way of doing so. Guess what? You likely don't have this knowledge. And you probably are glad you don't, and are maybe even proud that your don't. And you likely excuse yourself for feeling this way, while blaming others for feeling the same about a topic your care about.
- peoplefromibiza 3y ago
  > 99% of people will never need or use calculus in their life. Most jobs have zero to do with Excel. doesn't imply that ignoring the Kardashians is as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. (direct quote from you) > There are probably 100s of millions of people who care about what celebrity X is up to But if those celebrities died together at the same time, very few of those 100 millions people would actually suffer any consequence. So they are basically useless to society, math and science are provably not. > Knowing celebrity news allows for instant connection with millions of people who also know about this news I'll pass om that, thank you. Millions of people watch soccer in my country, never cared for a second. Guess what? I have tons of connections with people I share common interests with. Who would have thought that was possible? > Guess what? You likely don't have this knowledge. And you probably are glad you don't, and are maybe even proud that your don't. Have you ever considered that people simply don't care and their life is just as good as anybody else? I honestly don't understand what drives your thought process, but if you are thinking that I need to excuse myself for not caring about most famous people, sorry to break the news for you, you don't know how wrong you are. > while blaming others for feeling the same about a topic your care about. That's just you assuming bad faith. I don't care what other people care about or not, it doesn't affect me at all, I simply replied to pride in ignorance of social happenings is just as bad as pride in ignorance of math/science. It is simply not.

dclowd9901 3y ago

I think this is a good way to demonize a person for displaying proud ignorance of a topic but is probably inaccurate. Just as I simply do not care about celebrity news (rather than actively despise its existence), I’m sure many people simply do not care about many of the things I enjoy. I don’t begrudge them that. We all have a limited time on earth, and we spend that time on things we enjoy. Most of us probably can’t even explain _why_ we like the things we do, but part of enjoying what we do means not over analyzing it, and rather just giving ourselves to it. I think this applies universally to interests.